It’s already been agreed that he has the schematic and a recipe. He knows how much resources he needs, and has the diagram on how to build it.
Yeah, but now he wants to know how the planner motivates his slaves. He’s venturing into totalitarian principle-agent relations. My guess is that he would probably use coercion.
Capitalism is not about managers, it is about capitalists. This is an important distinction that socialists often miss out on. Capitalists are expected to know their business process in-depth up to the point where they can rely on price-based accounting, thus to rely on the knowledge of different capitalists who know different business processes in-depth.
Oh yeah sure. He can build modern warships with hundreds of millions of parts and hundreds of thousands of people.. all without prices. All with a whip.
Amazing how you just flipped 180 from they cannot build ships and modern pencils.
I did. I believed Mises answered it. As for what will happens the morning after. I don’t know and you don’t know either
I’m not going to debate you on this anymore. This is a waste of time. Justt call it quits already. Move on.,
He still needs to know how to get the resources that are the input to the process. Does he have a recipe and diagram for all of them, starting with food and raw minerals?
No, production isn’t guided by intuitive entrepreneurs. It’s coordinated by the profit motive and the price mechanism. Your position is a straw man.
I will have to ignore him for now. I called him on his assertions and he called me stupid for it.
At any rate I am giving this a break and will be back tomorrow. I respectfully sent an email of someone who I trust has a solid understanding of the Econ Calc problem. Aside from the radically devastating Hayek quote above which pretty much sets the record straight, I will ask my corespondents permission if I can post his response when/if I get it.
I hate how disputes are only resolved with appeals to authority on this site.
A diagram of how to build it is useless without being able to calculate the expenditure costs of the various materials and labor. A diagram of how to build is not an economic plan. This is the argument, isn’t it? economic planning, and not useless theoretical schematic diagrams of some dreamer crazy director.
I’ve no idea what this is. It’s neither a denial nor an argument.
Your inability to comprehend simple arguments is not my problem. How did the Egyptians build the pyramids and the Sphynx (I understand that warships are more sophisticated than pyramids, but that’s not the point. The point is that Egyptian central planners (Pharaohs) were able to build things with millions of parts and hundreds of thousands of people, all without prices and with a whip)? Did they have capital markets? Either way, flic said if. Now if you could just answer the question…
I don’t know what tell you man.
It is regrettable. Ideally people are honest with themselves and come here with a genuine concern for learning and improving their own knowledge. But I feel that others are more concerned with being right, winning arguments, and talking down to people. The following quote is a wonderful example of how unproductive it can become.
No it doesn’t. Hayek is talking about what happens after the economy is transformed from capitalism to Socialism. I actually addressed this many many times.
There are no costs. Simply because there is no price doesn’t mean the planner stares dumbfounded at a balance sheet, he has no balance sheet. The entire regions resources are available to him at the movement of his hand. He is a dictator, that is what planners are.
They don’t care for costs(nor opportunity costs).
And the one single quote you use from mises was pulled entirely out of context, in a single chapter specificxally talking about socialism. Meanwhile there are over 10 other references (perhaps 20 if not more) in the entire book of Human Action where Mises explains that Economic Calculation has specifically to do with MONEY, and PRICES.
You can only tirelessly repeat the same quote of mises over and over, because if you searched through the PDF version of HA, all the other references of Economic Calculation are talking about money, not planning.
I like how you skipped over that entire post of mine earlier where I referenced several of them.
Give it up. These people don’t even speak English, don’t expect them to understand Hayek.
And the Egyptians were an example of a socialist commonwealth? Or did they have some money prices despite their vast public works schemes.
I thought you understood the problem, but I guess you didn’t.
This argumetn started over what the socialist calculation argument is as presented by Mises. So it is perfectly legitimate to resort to his authority. But after this statement from you above, it seems that you disagree with Mises. Or you want to start the whole thing all over again.
I won’t.
What are you trying to say here? Are you saying that ancient Egyptian kings bought labor and capital from ancient Egyptian markets? Or do you concede the point, namely that you can organize massive public works without markets and prices–all with a whip.
They certainly did.
Are you saying that Egyptians had no money prices?
And are you disagreeing with Mises’ conclusions regarding the socialist commonwealth, yet again? (Don’t tell me I’m using authority. That was the original debate)